Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au
Migration Alliance is in receipt of the following information:
The ACS wishes to inform you of the below information so you may advise your clients accordingly.
The ACS is aware of organisations who are ‘selling’ ACS RPL forms and has in placemeasures to ensure that the integrity of the documentation remains intact.
ACS RPL forms are vetted to ensure the information is not plagiarised either from an external source or another applicants RPL form.
In accordance with the Skill Assessment Guidelines for Applicants –
It is your responsibility to indicate when you have drawn on the work of others. Other people’s original ideas and methods should be clearly distinguished, and other people’s words, illustrations and diagrams should be clearly indicated regardless of whether they are copied exactly, paraphrased, or adapted.
Failure to acknowledge your source by clear citation and referencing constitutes plagiarism. All plagiarism will be assessed as not suitable and reported to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.
If plagiarism is detected an application will be finalised as unsuitable and the application fee will not be refunded.
Any subsequent applications will need to be submitted as a new application and will require the new application fee.
Ok now that we all agree with me ( my preferred consultation model)...who would like to participate in an "Anomalies Project" with me at MA to highlight this and other issues so we can agitate for change? If you are interested in participating please send me an email at christopher@levingston.com.au headed up "Anomalies Project".
I would like to see that ACS and all of the independent appointed skills assessing authorities do all they can to harmonise their requirements with the skill levels and english language requirements set out in skillselect. The current system where the skills assessing authorities do their own thing is unacceptable. This could be achieved by the simple expedient of having a skills assessing authority make a skills assessment on what ever basis it chooses but to also have a category wherein it issues a skills assessment limited for the purposes of indicating that the applicant meets the requirements of skillselect. Consideration may also be given to making the whole process a lot more transparent at both primary and appeal level with parties having access to judicial review. Whilst i am at it...the fees for skills assessment are in some cases outrageous. I have no objection for fee for service but some of the fees are outrageous.